Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Holding my hands up I was a naughty boy driving a transit van along the A55 in Wales in February and exceeded 60mph in what I thought was a 70mph zone. ( all to do with the weight of the van). When I realised the error of my way I took the fine and sent my licence off by Royal Mail. Yesterday I received a letter from North Wales Police saying that I was now being prosecuted in court for failing to surrender my licence. I paid the fine as soon as I received the £100 penalty letter and carefully read the form ( which is confusing to say the least) and immediately took a walk to the post box and sent my licence off. In hindsight I’m a fool for believing that the licence would get to the HMCS in Loughborough without the need to track and trace the letter. I still believe that Royal Mail hasn’t lost the letter with my licence in it as I have never had any other letter go astray. I believe the licence is with HMCS it’s just not yet been processed probably due to Covid backlog. Seems Covid is to blame for everything these days. How can I avoid this going to court? I’ve never had a speeding ticket in over thirty years of driving or any other ticket hence why I was keen to comply with the ticket and send my licence off as instructed.
    • Rejection letter to be sent to the FOS   I am declining your decision of 13th April for the following reason:   Much of your decision is predicated on your view that Aviva had a “process” in place and that they follow this process and as a result the decision to enter an insurance contract in 2015 was fair. 1.      Nowhere in your decision have you explained what the process was and whether in fact the process was fair. Clearly your view is that regards of the process, all that was needed was for Aviva apparently to follow this process and any outcome would be fair.   2.      On 2 June 2021 I received a telephone call from the Aviva complaint team. During the conversation, they informed me that in fact that in 2015 the call handler had been wrong and had not followed the correct process. The Aviva caller told me that it was not part of the process for the call handler in 2015 to refer her suspicions to her manager. Clearly, if the call handler in 2015 had adhered to the correct process and allowed herself to be guided by her own suspicions then Aviva would not have agreed to provide the insurance cover and they would not have become the victim of fraud. In fact that we find is that the correct process at the very serious suspicions of the call handler were overridden by a manager. It seems evident that either Aviva has misled you as to the nature of the process or else they have not disclosed their process to you. It may even be that they do not have a written “process”. They only have “a way of doing things”. If it is correct that you have not seen the Aviva process but have simply taken their word for it, then it is clear that your investigation and your decision has for the short of any reasonable standards. If on the other hand Aviva has misled you as to the nature of the process, then I think you have a very serious issue with Aviva. I believe that you have ever seen the “process” upon which you are purporting to rely on your decision. You may be interested to know that the man who defrauded Aviva also attempted to use my identity to defraud a number of loan companies. I’m pleased to say that all of them exercise sufficient diligence that they did not become victims of the fraud. Only Aviva failed to exercise proper care and allowed themselves to be defrauded. You may also be interested to know that the police have interviewed me and they have interviewed my brother and they are preparing to charge my brother in respect of his fraudulent activity. I am under no suspicion whatsoever. The police have informed me that they will be speaking with Aviva facing fairly soon. There are many other reasons why I am refusing to accept your decision. All the other reasons turn on the fairness of your decision that the reasons above, go to the heart of your own process and the quality of your investigation. I think it’s not insignificant that I have submitted a Freedom of Information Act request and also a Data Protection Subject Access Request to you and so far you have failed to respond within statutory deadlines. I have also sent Aviva a Subject Access Request and they have extended the deadline for compliance by a full two months for spurious reasons which I do not believe. I have also asked Aviva for sight of their policies and procedures in respect of the rules that they apply to their customers for the setting up of new business and I have received no response. The Aviva website makes a show of being aware of the dangers of domestic financial abuse and they trumpet their association with the organisation Surviving Economic Abuse and they say that their staff are all trained in spotting the signs. I have asked to see their abuse policy and I have received no response. None of this is surprising.    It is clear that Aviva have acted carelessly. They were suspicious but preferred to get the new business. It is Aviva which is the victim of fraud but they prefer to try and avoid their responsibility and pass the buck onto me. I’m pointing out that it is Aviva which is the victim of fraud because I can state categorically now that I have no intention of paying any of the money which Aviva is demanding of me. I notice that Aviva prefers to harass me for an alleged debt rather than simply bring a claim in the County Court where an impartial judge would look at all the evidence including information which so far Aviva has declined to disclose.   This letter is intended to decline to accept your decision but also is intended to be my formal complaint which I wish to be escalated to the Independent Assessor. Please confirm receipt of this complaint, provide me with any policies and guidelines the Independent Assessor route and also let me know the timescales involved.   Yours faithfully
    • The G7 hasn't gone to plan, has it?   Rather than showing the UK off as a potential global leader, Johnson has probably started a trade war with the EU and is being told that other nations don't trust him.
    • Hi   I assume this mattress was the Tenants own property?   So after moving out the Tenants provided an attachment showing a stained mattress and wanting full deposit back and threatening to claim against you for this.   1. Tenants failed to notify you of this stained mattress issue until the end of tenancy after they had vacated the property.   2. You have no evidence that this was the actual mattress used in that property nor evidence to back up there claim the staining caused this mattress damage.  (i.e. one of them could have had an accident and wet the bed or done this when they moved from the property).     3. Ask them that you wish the mattress independently inspected. (which you are fully entitled to do and if it proves this claim is false it will be added to the deposit claim by you the landlord for damages as well as the Garden if you need to get landscapers in to carry out the work that should have been carried out by Tenants as per Tenacy Agreement and raised  by yourself (Landlord) on a few occasions which Tenants failed to rectify even at end of tenancy.   4. Ask them to provide you with the contact details of there Contents Insurance Company (tenants whether Private or Social Housing should always take out and have Contents Insurance but is up to that tenant) bet they don't provide it Big question is the Deposit protected in a Tenancy Deposit Scheme (TDS) and those Tenants that have left were given a copy of the Prescribed Terms for that TDS? (Bear in mind you may need to tell TDS that you are in dispute with the Tenant about damages i.e. mattress and Garden)    
    • plenty of time to research and calm down. nothing much to do until the end of june.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2775 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi, I was wondering if someone could help me.

 

I bought a car three months ago from Toyota, on the day of picking up that car, it broken down and eventually the battery went flat within a month. As a preapproved car they are meant to be fully serviced, have have their preinspection checks and any MOT advisory issues on the MOT to be rectified according to Toyota.

 

Ive asked for the preinspection checks which the garage don't have, and when I went through the servicing documents the car was due for a service the week after I picked up the car, and on the day of receiving the car I found that two of the tyres had advisory items which means I need to get them replaced soon. They've lied to me before when I requested an engine oil change because it was a dirty brown color and they stated that the car was not due for service on an invoice in september which is a month after a service was due.

 

They have only agreed to change the tyres if they see fit which is ridiculous as I paid extra for a preapproved car on the understanding that cars are fully serviced and MOT issues are rectified. I know that they have breached contract in the SOGA and OFT unfair selling regulations. They've said that this is the most they will do for me seeing as I've had the car for three months even though I stopped using the car since the start of october and I've told them this in correspondence.

 

They are refusing to accept any fault, and even though I've highlighted my concerns many times they are not dealing with me seriously. I don't want to have to take this to court as it has wasted enough of my time trying to get through to them. I have also contacted head office who refuse to deal with it as I purchased a preapproved honda from them rather than a toyota.

 

I'd be grateful for any advice, thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did the car break down? mechanical failure, anything that happens to a car such as mechanical failure within the first six months the garage has to repair or give you your money back....

 

have read of this...

 

oft.gov.uk/ shared_oft/reports/676408/oft1242.pdf

 

read it carefully and pick out the points relevant to you and then just let them have it :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply. I have already 'let them have it' unfortunately.

 

The car broke down because the battery went flat, but they've since replaced it whilst blaming me for leaving my lights on, which is impossible.

They wont acknowledge how they misrepresented the car to me and continue making it out as if it is my fault that the battery ran flat and that I am being out of order requesting the tyres to be changed. I know having a second hand car you aren't meant to expect a perfect condition but I would expect if you've promised through a preapproved car scheme that you would have cars fully serviced, with preinspection checks and rectifying any advisory issues before selling it on.

 

Does anyone know of which trading bodies I can go to in order to complain? I have spoken to the CAB who have been helpful but have told me that it wouldn't be likely that I would win a court case as the car is not unroadworthy, but I would have assumed misrepresenting a vehicle would be enough in court? Its been hard finding a trading body which takes on these complaints which is why it is still a reoccurring issue in the news. I think it would be unfair for them to do this to customers especially targeting people who are unable to fight back because of lack of regulation or support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Motorcodes are the people you need to talk to! To be honest looking at this as an outsider I don't think there is much else you can do! They have replaced everything you have asked them to do.

 

If you still want to go ahead I will get an rac inspection on the car and use that report as ammunition you will of course have to pay about 150 quid I think. This will check everything on the car and if you win at court you can claim that cost back.

 

But if I were in your shoes I would just leave it as it's not worth the trouble versus any compensation you get!

 

But just keep a keen eye on everything on the car and any issues take it straight back...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for your reply. I have already 'let them have it' unfortunately.

 

The car broke down because the battery went flat, but they've since replaced it whilst blaming me for leaving my lights on, which is impossible.

 

Your opening post suggested the car broke down, and then the battery 'went flat'.

 

The issue is of course down to an electrical issue, but whether that is the fault of the vehicle or the user is what is currently under dispute.

You say the supplier has changed the battery at some point, has this cured the issue ?

Lights are near the top of the list of the most common devices left on by owners, however this could be a number of items depending on the model. Most cars will have a circuit where the indicator will illuminate one side of the vehicle when parked if the stalk is left in a certain position. Then there is the radio and /or sat-nav system, potentially a inboard courtesy light (which may be in the boot or glove compartment if not immediately visible), and even something connected to the cigarette lighter. All of these are outside the scope of investigation by the dealer even if the vehicle was delivered back to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We had an issue with pre-approved car where the tyres required replacing which were only just legal, but luckily I had spotted it prior to signing any documents. We had to come back the next day. So not an isolated incident regarding tyres.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the advice! Well they've not replaced the tyres yet and I'm hoping they will (if they deem it unfit) , I just think its bad practice to promise if you can't deliver! They've just been such a pain to deal with, I will never buy from Toyota again!

 

The battery went flat the day i drove it off the forecourt, luckily i had stopped outside Halford and had someone from there help me get it running again. The car lights are on auto so I know that I definitely did not leave the lights on. They have changed the battery, but they said that everything was fine at the time of testing meaning that there must have been some mechanical reason for the car to not start if it wasn't a due to a faulty battery.

 

In regards to the RAC inspection, if I get an inspection done by them and there's a few faults can I legally ask them to fix all the faults and get the £150 back or can that only be done through courts? To be honest if they're stingy enough to refuse to change the tyres, it'd be unlikely they'd pay the inspection fee!

 

Anyway once again, thanks for all your input!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I went in to ask them for proof, the sales advisor was completely unaware of any preinspection checks on the car, it was only when his manager discussed it with him that he said that they would have checks but they aren't on their system. To be honest I wouldn't be suprised if they create a backdated preinspection sheet. They did the MOT for the car the day after the sale so they were obviously just trying to make a quick sale, the advisory section mentions the two tyres and the MOT company said that they only put an advisory on it if its less than manufacturers recommended. But even still, these tyres are legal, which is Toyota's argument. Anyway it's being taken in today for checks, service and they might change the tyres if they think it needs changing.. thats a big IF. They've said that they will provide written documentation on all the checks they do on the vehicle, so fingers crossed they'll be decent enough to do it all properly!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...